Sign Up

NCLA Site Search

Amicus Briefs

Haaland v. Brackeen

CASE SUMMARY

Under the Constitution, courts have a duty “to say what the law is.” NCLA believes that courts shirk that duty when they defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of the law—under a judge-made rule known as “Chevron deference.” In this case, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit determined that several provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) were ambiguous and then deferred to a federal agency’s interpretation of those provisions. NCLA responded by filing a brief urging the Fifth Circuit to rehear the case en banc (that is, a rehearing before all judges sitting on the Fifth Circuit). In a victory for NCLA, the court agreed to do so. NCLA then filed a second brief, arguing that judges should stop deferring to others’ interpretation of the law and instead should rely on their own best judgment when construing federal statutes.  The Fifth Circuit’s eventual ruling was a partial victory for NCLA. The court refused to defer to the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ (BIA) interpretation of one ICWA provision and struck down BIA’s interpretive regulation, but it applied Chevron deference to uphold a second BIA regulation.

In February 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the case to determine whether certain provisions of the ICWA are unconstitutional. But the Supreme Court did not address the Chevron deference issues ruled upon by the Fifth Circuit.

OUR TEAM

Mark Chenoweth
President and Chief Legal Officer
Margaret A. Little
Senior Litigation Counsel

RELEVANT MATERIALS

NCLA FILINGS

Decision of the U.S. Supreme Court

June 15, 2023 | Read More

Brief Amicus Curiae of the New Civil Liberties Alliance in Support of Petitioner in No. 21-378

June 2, 2022 | Read More

Decision of the U.S. of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

April 6, 2021 | Read More

Brief of Amicus Curiae New Civil Liberties Alliance in Support of the Plaintiffs-Appellees on Rehearing En Banc

January 7, 2020 | Read More

Brief of Amicus Curiae New Civil Liberties Alliance in Support of the Plaintiffs-Appellees’ Petition for Rehearing En Banc

October 10, 2019 | Read More

PRESS RELEASES

NCLA Amicus Brief Tells Supreme Court that the ICWA Wrongly Divests Legislative Power

June 3, 2022 | Read More

NCLA Asks Court to Not Abandon Its Duty of Independent Judgment in BIA Case Under Chevron Deference

January 7, 2020 | Read More

IN THE MEDIA

Nondelegation v. Equal Protection: How Emotional Resonance Guides the Court’s Attention

NCLA Blog

July 7, 2023

Fractured 5th Circ. Keeps And Strikes Portions Of ICWA

Law360

February 8, 2023

RELATED CASES
  • American Honda Motor Co., Inc. v. Walther, Dir., and Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

    View Case
  • American Hospital Association, et al. v. Xavier Becerra, et al.

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Case Closed - June 15, 2022

    Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services

    View Case
  • Aposhian v. Garland

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Scope of Authority / Nondelegation

    The structure of the Constitution allows only Congress to legislate, only the Executive to enforce laws, and only the Judiciary to decide cases. But the Administrative State evades the Constitution’s avenues of governance when executive agencies issue regulations without statutory authorization from Congress.

    Guidance Abuse

    Agency guidance is easier to promulgate than formal rules and regulations, so agencies prefer to issue it. Such “guidance” supplies relatively informal indications of how an agency interprets rules and statutes. Although guidance is not permitted to bind Americans (unlike laws made by elected legislators), agencies treat guidance as binding and courts often fail to stop them.

    Case Active - January 7, 2019

    Agencies: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

    View Case
  • Howard and Karen Baldwin v. United States

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Case Closed - February 24, 2020

    Agencies: Internal Revenue Service

    View Case
  • Marcus Broadway v. United States

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: U.S. Sentencing Commission

    View Case
  • Thomas H. Buffington v. Denis McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

    Judicial Deference

    Deference doctrines require judges to defer to an administrative agency’s fact finding, or its interpretation of statutes and regulations. Thus, judges surrender their independent judgment and, where the government is a party, must exhibit systematic bias in the government’s favor, which denies due process of law to the other litigant.

    Due Process Violations

    The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

    Case Closed -

    Agencies: Department of Veterans Affairs

    View Case

SHARE THIS CASE

Enter your email address above to be notified whenever we post a new document to this case.